Breastfeeding support groups and community resources

Lawrence, Ruth A.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-323-02823-3.50027-9

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some PC interventions have started postpartum, whereas other programmes have arranged for the PC to meet the pregnant women during the antenatal period before the birth experience [ 7 , 8 , 13 - 15 , 19 ] Although we are aware of no study comparing interventions started in the antepartum period with those started only in postpartum period, it is likely that the longer the period that a mother is assigned to a PC, the higher probability that the PC will be included as a member of the mother's support network, and the more influence the PC will have on the mother's breastfeeding decision and later breastfeeding practice))[ 20 ]. It has been suggested that qualitative research should explore the different elements of breastfeeding support strategies and the mechanisms by which support operates [ 6 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a peer counselling programme to sustain breastfeeding practice in Hong Kong

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPeer counselling is reported to increase breastfeeding rates. We evaluated an intervention consisting of mainly telephone contact peer counselling programme on breastfeeding duration and exclusivity.MethodsPeer counsellors (PCs) were mothers who had successfully breastfed and had received formal training. Following a postnatal visit, they provided scheduled telephone consultations (Days 1, 4, 7, Weeks 2, 4, 8, and Month 4) to PC group mothers (n = 100) who continued breastfeeding their infants after discharge. Control group mothers (n = 100) received routine care.ResultsAfter adjusting for mothers' previous breastfeeding experiences, mothers' working status and breastfeeding problems, no statistical differences in mothers' feeding methods (exclusive, almost exclusive or predominant breastfeeding) were noted at the three follow-up times for intervention and control mothers respectively (Day 5: 37%/38%, 46%/53%, 57%/63%; Month 3: 10%/9%, 17%/23%, 20%/26%; Month 6: 2%/1%, 18%/18%, 18%/19%). All differences between the groups were not significant. Also, there was no evidence to suggest that PC intervention prolonged breastfeeding duration.ConclusionThe lack of effect of our PC intervention may reflect the low baseline breastfeeding rate and low value placed on breastfeeding in our population, the type of PC intervention or group allocation biases.Trial registrationISRCTN93605280.

show abstract